As fascinating (and yes, relevant) as Gettier problems are, I still think JTB works just fine as a definition of knowledge 99% of the time. I consider it loosely analogous to Newtonian mechanics in physics. I am a bit sad we didn't get to cover my favorite Gettier case, though: I think Mike is in his room, because I can see him seated at his desk studying. But it turns out that's a hologram and Mike is actually hiding under the desk reading a comic book. Did I know Mike is in his room, based on my justification and the sheer dumb luck that he wasn't reading his comic book in (for example) the WC?
If knowledge implies truth, and truth implies certainty, and belief implies probability,and probability implies not certainty, then belief is not knowledge.
Of course you can believe contradictory things. It just means that you don't understand all the implications. It's always seemed to me as though it should be one, two, three-prime, rather than one, two, three, four. That is, the question that's immediately raised by Gettier cases (if we want to salvage something like JTB) isn't what else is needed, but what sort of justification is needed. It may be that no such revision will work, but it still seems like the natural starting point.
As fascinating (and yes, relevant) as Gettier problems are, I still think JTB works just fine as a definition of knowledge 99% of the time. I consider it loosely analogous to Newtonian mechanics in physics.
I am a bit sad we didn't get to cover my favorite Gettier case, though: I think Mike is in his room, because I can see him seated at his desk studying. But it turns out that's a hologram and Mike is actually hiding under the desk reading a comic book. Did I know Mike is in his room, based on my justification and the sheer dumb luck that he wasn't reading his comic book in (for example) the WC?
Thank you for this video! :) Have there been more 3 page articles? 😄
ALL articles should be three pages or fewer
"Knowledge" == "static information"
simple.
information is defined as entanglement.
Therefore,
you have information theory.
If knowledge implies truth, and truth implies certainty, and belief implies probability,and probability implies not certainty, then belief is not knowledge.
Sir please upload video on fourt condition of knowledge, like no false lemma.
Of course you can believe contradictory things. It just means that you don't understand all the implications.
It's always seemed to me as though it should be one, two, three-prime, rather than one, two, three, four. That is, the question that's immediately raised by Gettier cases (if we want to salvage something like JTB) isn't what else is needed, but what sort of justification is needed. It may be that no such revision will work, but it still seems like the natural starting point.